Feature discussion - Reactions or Likes

[Inkerlink]

~Admin note: this thread has been split from the main Feature Requests thread because its a good discussion and others should be able to find it in the future ^^

Would it be possible to implement emoticon reactions for posts? Sometimes I feel like I want to acknowledge someones post but if I don't have anything worthwhile to add in a full post I'd rather do something like react to it.
That being said, I do realize that's tip-toeing on the line between old web and new web... so I wouldn't lose sleep over this request being denied 

[j]

Would it be possible to implement emoticon reactions for posts? Sometimes I feel like I want to acknowledge someones post but if I don't have anything worthwhile to add in a full post I'd rather do something like react to it.
That being said, I do realize that's tip-toeing on the line between old web and new web... so I wouldn't lose sleep over this request being denied 

i'd support this to be honest - i'm all for taking the best of the new web and old web and squishing things together to make a new new web.

i know that a lot of my friends and people i know my age don't use forums because they require a significant amount of content in each message (fair enough: a forum's a forum) or they feel that it's too difficult to express tone, react to things and let others know that you've seen and acknowledged what they've said.

i feel it a little too, when i made my introductory post: had the urge like i do with other sites to leave a thumbs up or smiley on replies to my original post just to say that i had seen what others had said and appreciated it!!

think it'd be cool in bringing folks that have grown up with the modern web on board forums again :D

[Memory]

A good compromise between @Inkerlink 's emoticon reactions (which I think would be a negative; the fact that we are forced to write posts to react to something leads to more interesting, respectful and detailed interaction) and none at all, would be: simple likes; those existed in a lot of forums.

HOWEVER, I think that these are often used to build resentment and bully people. Imagine having a long form, respectful argument (like the art crediting ones) where the other person gets 20 likes and you get like one; it builds resentment, humiliation and feels like ganging up on people. It feels like people don't value your argument or input and would rather you shut up and concede in the face of "ratio".

Plus, people are known to let like counts influence their opinions. Something with a lot of likes is viewed as trustworthy, which can build cliques.

HOWEVER AGAIN, my final idea would be to implement likes, but only for threads, not comments. That'd curb argument-siding reaction spam and would still be able to push up cool content and reward people. But honestly, we already have profile awards...

But I still feel like reaction/like counters build an unhealthy way of interacting with people where the forum becomes a game of farming likes more than interacting. I'd vote against the whole idea. Maybe we should instead normalize writing short acknowledgements like 'Thanks!' more often to the same effect.

[Memory]

On Discord, Twitter, Facebook and so on reactions are very often used to ridicule, laugh at or participate in an argument, implicitly to hurt the ego of the "losing" side.

I disagree with the idea of adapting our world just to draw in people from the toxic web and grow in numbers; if they like it there, they can stay there, and we keep our doors open instead for people who want to get away from all that and who actually like what we have.

[Inkerlink]

A good compromise between @Inkerlink 's emoticon reactions (which I think would be a negative; the fact that we are forced to write posts to react to something leads to more interesting, respectful and detailed interaction) and none at all, would be: simple likes; those existed in a lot of forums.

HOWEVER, I think that these are often used to build resentment and bully people. Imagine having a long form, respectful argument (like the art crediting ones) where the other person gets 20 likes and you get like one; it builds resentment, humiliation and feels like ganging up on people. It feels like people don't value your argument or input and would rather you shut up and concede in the face of "ratio".

Plus, people are known to let like counts influence their opinions. Something with a lot of likes is viewed as trustworthy, which can build cliques.

HOWEVER AGAIN, my final idea would be to implement likes, but only for threads, not comments. That'd curb argument-siding reaction spam and would still be able to push up cool content and reward people. But honestly, we already have profile awards...

But I still feel like reaction/like counters build an unhealthy way of interacting with people where the forum becomes a game of farming likes more than interacting. I'd vote against the whole idea. Maybe we should instead normalize writing short acknowledgements like 'Thanks!' more often to the same effect.

Yeah that's a good point, I wouldn't want it to become a popularity contest or anything like that. And I agree there is a chance it would bring down high quality engagement. I suppose if I don't have anything worthwhile to add to a conversation then that's fine in and of itself, I don't ALWAYS have to make my acknowledgement known. I guess if I particularly like a post I could always just send the person a nice profile comment or DM instead.

[Melooon]

Iv thought about this topic a lot and Im surprised it's taken so long for someone to request reactions, but today is the day 

It's something that we technically can do; both multi-emote reactions or a traditional like system - however Im in the same camp as @/home/user/, my own experiences with reactions have always been quite negative; either I get stressed that I'm not getting enough likes, or Im stressed because people are using them against me, without giving me the dignity of a fair discussion. The issue is in the name "reaction" - our first reactions are usually wrong; it's better to value people who can slow down and provide a considered and thoughtful response.

It's a fair argument to say that it's nice to get or provide acknowledgement, but I also think that many people have a really unhealthy relationship with acknowledgement; your value does not come from the reaction of others, it comes from your existence. Even if 6 months pass before your post gets a response, you should trust that your words have value. One of the biggest differences between social media and personal websites is the lack of feedback; you're forced to enjoy what you have made, not the response others give to it; and I think that applies here too.

I don't really support the idea of normalising short replies either; saying "Thanks" doesn't really offer much - Instead, I would encourage people to look at the person they are engaging with, study their site or interests and give a genuine and thoughtful response to them e.g. "Thanks, I really like the colour on your site; it's cool that you like woodwork, Iv never been able to work with my hands; but I'm curious to know what you enjoy about it?" etc - that makes it about opening up discussions and making room for discoveries.

From what I've seen; the main thing people want from the web revival is genuine and positive connections with others; but those connections require work, and taking the time to write responses and trust that your voice will be heard even if it gets no reaction right away is one of the foundation stones of building connections; not just with others, but also with yourself.

I guess I could be dramatic and say that reactions de-value humanity; maybe it's not so dramatic, but maybe it is  If part of the web revival is about giving people back their worth online; I think that genuine silence is better than an empty acknowledgement; and you're all worth time and a considered response instead of an easy thumbs up 

[Memory]

I completely agree with what @Melooon said and I think that a great place to see the value in the current approach is in the introduction and greeting threads. Usually (on Discord and Facebook), introductions to groups are to simply get "wave" reactions from the whole community, with actual comments being pretty rare.

But because now acknowledgement requires posting something textual, plenty of people are looking at the new member's site, comment on their hobbies or interests, or even find things they have in common!

This made me feel super welcome when I joined and is, I think, also a reason why people feel warm and at home here.

[sig]

I vote against as well: we'd be adding another 'meta' element to the discussion which is not really necessary I feel. I like thow the current trend in forum features is all about customization without diluting the discussion. Part of me would like to see them added, but that's the part of me wanting those sweet internet points and should not be listened to

[Gans]

Clearly dislike (heh, how comical in this topic).

And don't beg for a reaction on your posts. Especially a numerical value of a post. This is not a competition. This is a message board and communication is no competition either (except in business).

These programming sites out there do the voting system well. Because things are on point. For computer problems, a solution either works or it doesn't. Secondary are aesthetics, many solutions will lead to the finish, but some are easier. That's where a voting system shines, promoting the best answer usually, but the second best might be interesting too, and so on... 

But this forum is mostly chilled talking. "Like farming" would increase the amount of scrap posts being made. An "ignore posts" function would counterplay that somewhat, or not showing the numbers at all, of how many reactions someone got. But that would be patching up an avoidable self-made problem. Melon said it all.

[tarraxahum]

I think ComicFury forum does the 'like' feature well: only you can see likes on your post, and you can't see likes (or lack of thereof) on others' posts.

That pretty much avoids the negative usage of likes and potential like-bullying that people have mentioned. The importance of likes is also halved - if no one can see how liked or not-liked your posts are, then like farming stops being useful. It's not a social currency anymore.

That, of course, does not solve the problem of wanting 'internet points' solely for your own posterity and getting insecure for not getting them, but for me personally it does lessen it. Likes become rare when they are not important, something you consciously get out of your way to click instead of liking everything and everyone, so getting many stops being a thing that happens, and therefore stops being a goal.

I will admit I do sometimes have the urge to express 'hey, yeah, this!' or a similar emotion while not having anything to add to the overall conversation. And inflating those three words into a proper post sometimes feels too disingenuous (kinda like having to hit a certain amount of words on a school essay but you've already said everything you wanted), not at all productive. I do try to find genuine things to add most of the time (as you can imagine, looking at my posts' size, that's often not a problem), but if I don't feel I can - I end up not interacting positively at all... I'd say for those cases a small private "yup" would be good.

But also I won't suffer for their absence. Just suggesting a system I've seen working that does not create 'like anxiety' in me!

(maybe I should start making gifts to users for posts i especially like, ehe. just wait till i hit 100 posts first)

[garystu]

Forum softwares like Invision and Discourse offer this feature out of the box. And it's fine. I've been on small forums with a likes feature before. I've been Wrong About Star Wars (cardinal sin of online) (but I was really misinformed about the series, i can admit it) on a forum with reaction features before. And it was fine, because everyone on the forum was 30 or 40 years old because it was a small forum who gives a shit.

A lot of you are transplanting problems from bigger sites onto a smaller site. And maybe youd have a point if this site became like as big as reddit, i mean lol it wont. But i've been on small sites and the problems of larger sites just don't exist. Even if you've only experienced a small Discord server, you know problems only occur at scale.

What about flame wars? What about them? Mods can break it up, or at least disable likes on arguments. Do mods have zero reaction to flaming on here already. would it be adding extra work.

What about clout farming? If somebody wanted that sweet melon land clout it would be. fascinating, actually. we need a weird freak obsessed with clout here it would be so funny.

What about negative reactions? Don't have negative reactions. Here's some reactions you could use:                              (dont use this many) They all convey different positive emotions.

I don't think there should be a profile-level total likes tally. just like how this forum doesn't show your total post count. but I don't see a problem with them being public-facing on individual posts.

[wygolvillage]

On Proboards forums I like the like feature since it's nice to know someone appreciated my post even if they didn't have time to reply. It sends you a notification as well as appends a "person a and person b liked this" message onto your post's header. I like this system because there isn't a downvote or dislike button, and I don't feel too bad when my post doesn't have any likes anyway.

I can see how issues would arrive due to implementing "metrics" but I also feel like this is a space that encourages looking past the numbers game of social media...?

I feel like there could be a middle ground there, maybe you can only see the likes that are on your own posts to discourage comparison with others.

[Melooon]

maybe you can only see the likes that are on your own posts to discourage comparison with others.

This seems like it could be a fair middle ground - how do others feel about it?

[dirtnap]

melooon has already neatly expressed most of my thoughts, and more eloquently than i could. these one-click response formats such as likes or emoticon reactions commodify human connection in a way i am deeply uncomfortable with.

the commodification, in my experience, is not the fact that the "message" (the number going up) is simple and lacking depth. it's the method through which it is delivered.

i've been on forums in which responding with nothing longer or more detailed than a "cool" or "lol" was (at least in the right context) perfectly acceptable. that's simple and lacking in depth, but feel much more like human-to-human communication than the act of clicking a button and hoping the intended recipient notices you did that.

it also feels invasive. someone else is putting something on my post. i don't like the idea that someone would have control over what others see when they look at a post i wrote. while on an intellectual level the commodification of connection bothers me, on a personal level, it's definitely this that bothered me the most a few years ago, when a site i used daily introduced a "like" feature. i have no way of preventing others from seeing those likes. if i could, i would prevent users from even being able to issue them to me.

i have likes, reactions, and any other such thing blocked in ubo on every website i visit. i don't want to see them. if melonland introduces them, i would be doing the same, but on such a small forum, i would also be concerned about the loss of connection that would create.

with that said:

I think ComicFury forum does the 'like' feature well: only you can see likes on your post, and you can't see likes (or lack of thereof) on others' posts.

I feel like there could be a middle ground there, maybe you can only see the likes that are on your own posts to discourage comparison with others.

This seems like it could be a fair middle ground - how do others feel about it?

as above, that commodification of connection would still be present. i would still feel something is lost by the introduction of this feature.

however, i wouldn't raise any objections about a "private" like feature that works the opposite way to the one proposed here.

instead of only the recipient seeing the likes, only the sender should. imagine archive of our own's "kudos" system, but no-one can see kudos, not even the author. however, if you give a kudos, the button then becomes "you already gave kudos!" and you can't click it again.

personally, i'd much rather see a relaxing of the guidelines on post length and depth so the occasional, contextually-appropriate "lol" or "thanks" one-word post becomes acceptable. if someone would rather respond with an emoticon or nothing, i'd have no issue with them doing so by posting the two characters :D

[Marchy]

This seems like it could be a fair middle ground - how do others feel about it?

I think public likes are perfectly fine, even on comments. The Discord problem mentioned, from what I've experienced, is that custom emojis can be used to send any message other than just "liking" the post. All of the forums I've been on over the years have had public likes without issue. Some will even give out badges for "popular threads of the month" or something similar as a way to encourage well thought-out content, but that requires a bit of manual intervention.

on "like farming" - I really think that's exclusively a social media issue. On Facebook, reddit, and other platforms, you're fighting with the almighty algorithm on a single "timeline" view hoping to catch someone's attention, but it wasn't always that way. In a curated forum community with focused topics, popular posts happen in popular categories with interesting content. That's all. Content is not presented to you in a format where you can mindlessly like and scroll, but being able to communicate feedback on something you find interesting without giving a "verbose" explanation for no reason is an incredibly useful tool.